From: dje@google.com (Doug Evans)
To: gdb@sourceware.org
Subject: i386 int3 handling, running vs stepping
Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2009 23:18:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090201231819.A9FB61C7A19@localhost> (raw)
gdb is inconsistent in its handling of int3 instructions on x86.
bash$ cat int3.S
.text
.global main
main:
nop
int3
nop
hlt
bash$ gcc -g -Wa,-g int3.S -o int3
bash$ gdb int3
(gdb) run
-->
Program received signal SIGTRAP, Trace/breakpoint trap.
main () at int3.S:6
6 nop
Note that $pc is the insn AFTER the int3.
Question: Is this a bug? Should $pc point to the int3 instead?
[whether that's achieved with decr_pc_after_break or whatever
is a separate question]
I can argue either case, I don't have a preference per se.
Trying things again, this time stepi'ing over the insn:
bash$ gdb int3
(gdb) start
[...]
Temporary breakpoint 1, main () at int3.S:4
4 nop
Current language: auto; currently asm
(gdb) si
5 int3
(gdb) si
6 nop
(gdb)
Note that int3 was stepping over without a SIGTRAP being generated.
[I haven't tried setting a breakpoint at the int3 insn, but
GDB can know whether it's stepping over one of its own breakpoints
or an int3 that's part of the program, so I think(!) gdb can be consistent
here regardless.]
The only question I have is what should the value of $pc be after
hitting an int3 instruction during normal execution? (ie. no stepping,
no breakpoints).
next reply other threads:[~2009-02-01 23:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-02-01 23:18 Doug Evans [this message]
2009-02-01 23:33 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2009-02-01 23:38 ` Doug Evans
2009-02-02 4:25 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2009-02-02 20:03 ` Doug Evans
2009-02-02 21:49 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2009-02-03 1:26 ` Doug Evans
2009-02-03 4:08 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2009-02-03 9:22 ` Mark Kettenis
2009-02-02 0:52 ` Doug Evans
2009-02-02 6:08 ` Robert Dewar
2009-02-02 6:19 ` teawater
2009-02-03 9:21 ` Mark Kettenis
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20090201231819.A9FB61C7A19@localhost \
--to=dje@google.com \
--cc=gdb@sourceware.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox